Olympus 12-60 -- requesting feedback

[John Brawley]

@Shooter I'm not sure that's a fair response. I'm studying the craft as I go, and I appreciate the comments here which allow me to learn. I already got over the AF and happily doing manual focus. Are you trying to say that in manual iris this lens won't click?

I have many 4/3 mount lenses and a few m4/3 mount ones as well. All the 4/3 mount lenses will click when you change aperture. The thing that annoys me is that it seems to me to be NOISIER on the AF100 than on the GH2. The noisets of them all are than panaleica lenses as well ! The 25mm 1.4 is the worst of all.

The Olympus 14-35 is quiet. Focus action is also almost useable. This is probably the best of all the zooms.
The Olympus 35-100 is also pretty good, but the focus motor is noisier.
The Olympus 7-14 is medium noisy on both iris and focus.
The Olympus 150mm F2 is medium noisy and the focus is medium noisy as well.
The Olympus 50mm F2 iris is medium noisy and focus is not as noisy.
The Olympus 35mm F3.5 is noisy in both iris and focus.

The Panaleica 25mm F1.4 has the noisiest iris of all. Terrible !
The Panaleica 14-50 F2.8-3.5 is noisy but also has terrible breathing problems. Just touching the focus dial will cause the images to shift.

The Sigma 50mm F1.2 is not as noisy in iris and has a great manual focus action (makes me want to buy the 30mm)

jb

 

[Lpowell]

I have many 4/3 mount lenses and a few m4/3 mount ones as well. All the 4/3 mount lenses will click when you change aperture.

Here's a test you might want to try on your Four Thirds lenses. On the Leicasonic 14-50mm f2.8-3.5, I've found that the number of aperture clicks heard while zooming from 14-50mm depends on the lens' aperture setting:

f2.8 - 5 clicks
f3.2 - 3 clicks
f3.5 - 1 click
f4+ - no clicks

On the Olympus 35-100mm f2.0, I hear no clicks while zooming at any aperture setting. So I suspect the clicking in other lenses is a side-effect of the mechanism that handles the non-constant aperture.

 

[John Brawley]

Here's a test you might want to try on your Four Thirds lenses. On the Leicasonic 14-50mm f2.8-3.5, I've found that the number of aperture clicks heard while zooming from 14-50mm depends on the lens' aperture setting:

f2.8 - 5 clicks
f3.2 - 3 clicks
f3.5 - 1 click
f4+ - no clicks

On the Olympus 35-100mm f2.0, I hear no clicks while zooming at any aperture setting. So I suspect the clicking in other lenses is a side-effect of the mechanism that handles the non-constant aperture.

That makes sense. The lens is realistically closer to F4 by the time you're at 50mm anyway. The iris clicks when you change it. So as the lens ramps through, then you're going to hear the iris corrections.

I'm not so concerned about that as I rarely zoom in shot. But I hate that it clicks in the first place.

jb

 

[joshdstanton]

Can anyone comment on lens breathing during focusing. I'm particularly interested in how the 12-60 compares to the 14-35.
I understand the variable prime argument. Considering they are stills lenses, I can't expect a them to hold focus/exposure during a zoom. But if you can't do a nice clean focus pull without massive breathing it's probably not worth much.

 

[John Brawley]

Can anyone comment on lens breathing during focusing. I'm particularly interested in how the 12-60 compares to the 14-35.
I understand the variable prime argument. Considering they are stills lenses, I can't expect a them to hold focus/exposure during a zoom. But if you can't do a nice clean focus pull without massive breathing it's probably not worth much.

The 14-35 is actually pretty good as far as focus pulling. Very little breathing. I haven't looked at the 12-60.

jb

 

[Shooter]

I think that "lens breathing" is probably the least of considerations one should have when choosing a still lens (in particular) for a motion picture camera.

I would put all these factors well above it as possible "issues" in my list. (in no specific order)

Inferior glass
Lack of aperture ring
Noise from focus motors
Noise from aperture motors
Slow lenses
Non constant aperture across focal range (zoom lenses)
Image jump when rack focussing
Lenses needing firmware (bound for early obsoloscence)
Short focus range on focus ring from Inf to minimums
Un dampened focus rings
Light weight optics and engineering to accomodate OIS and fast auto focus. ( optics design compromisation)
Focus rings that have no end.
Aperture controlled lenses that lag
..... etc......


Breathing...Not an issue at all in my book

FWIW: Breathing is usually easy to manage (cover) in the operation of the shot. ie bury it in a pan or move or performance.

 

[joshdstanton]

Thanks Shooter.
So it's not an issue because it's usually pretty minimal, or just because you can hide it? I'm looking at the 12-60 because from what I can tell it passes most of those tests.

Anybody have a comment on 12-60 breathing?

(haha, focus ring that has no end! Funny.)

 

[Shooter]

Thanks Shooter.
So it's not an issue because it's usually pretty minimal, or just because you can hide it? I'm looking at the 12-60 because from what I can tell it passes most of those tests.

Anybody have a comment on 12-60 breathing?

(haha, focus ring that has no end! Funny.)

From what I can see..it doesnt meet many of the criteria on my list. Its only a personal thing so I suggest you put one on your camera and see if it suits you and the way you shoot.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/olympus_12-60_2p8-4_o20/

One thing for sure..nothing wrong with the glass in it.

I would be also fairly certain that the 12-60 has a focus ring with no end ...FWIW to you.

 

[Bern Caughey]

The Panaleica 14-50 F2.8-3.5 is noisy but also has terrible breathing problems. Just touching the focus dial will cause the images to shift.

Even though I knew most of it's problems I recently picked up a "Panaleica" 14-50 due to it's speed & OIS. I'll only use it handheld, & even then, only if I need the speed plus OIS. When the Birger mount gets here this lens will likely be replaced by the EOS 17-55/2.8 IS. The EOS isn't parfocal either, but much better in most respects.

Obviously breathing is a major issue. It's so extreme that focusing almost looks like a dolly-into-focus move. Sometimes I can hide this while handheld, but truly hate it.

One thing I haven't read is when mounted to the AF100 the distance readout is completely off. So much so that this feature is unusable. It seems to stem from slop in the lens' focusing mechanism. Distance readout seem good on the other Panasonic lenses, & the Olympus 14-35/2, but I need to test them thoroughly.

While the 14-140 is dog slow I still carry it everywhere. It doesn't do anything great, but it does a lot OK.

Regards,
Bern

 

[Shooter]

Obviously breathing is a major issue. It's so extreme that focusing almost looks like a dolly-into-focus move. Sometimes I can hide this while handheld, but truly hate it.

Just out of curiosity. When you see the breathing issue as you describe..how far are you racking (pulling) the lens? eg 2 feet to infinity or 2 feet to 5 feet...

I watched a guy in a shop testing a lens. What he was doing was racking from min to max, rapidly. Look at the breathing he said.

Most shots that require a focus change usually are not as extreme as mins to max.

 

[John Brawley]

Just out of curiosity. When you see the breathing issue as you describe..how far are you racking (pulling) the lens? eg 2 feet to infinity or 2 feet to 5 feet...

I watched a guy in a shop testing a lens. What he was doing was racking from min to max, rapidly. Look at the breathing he said.

Most shots that require a focus change usually are not as extreme as mins to max.

The 14-50 is unbelievably bad.

There is no hiding it in a move. (and really, why should you have to)

It's just not useable if you want to even touch the focus during a shot. Even a little bit. Just stay away from this lens. You'll think you can put up with it for OIS, but it's just not worth it.

And most of the shooting I do (drama), I'm always tweakingng the focus in-shot. So *maybe* if you're prepared to not have to touch focus mid shot then I guess you're fine.....

Run away from this lens. I've tried to use it twice and both times, I swapped it our after the 1st take. Great on my E5. Bad on my AF100.

jb

 

[Shooter]

Run away from this lens. I've tried to use it twice and both times, I swapped it our after the 1st take. Great on my E5. Bad on my AF100.

Good advice and a salutary lesson to anyone using still lenses on a movie camera. Choose carefully.

 

[Lpowell]

The 14-50 is unbelievably bad.

In all fairness, I think that's an undeservedly harsh judgment. Given that it's an electronically-focused zoom lens, I find the Leicasonic's badness to be quite believable. In this kind of lens design, the focus and zoom mechanisms are not entirely independent of each other. As a result, the lens zooms a bit when you focus it, and changes focus when you zoom it. This hasn't really been an issue for me, as I didn't think it was advisable to even attempt to do focus pulls on anything but manual-focus prime lenses.

In addition to the breathing issue, the Panasonic is really annoying to focus due to its extremely narrow focus ring that has no zoom stops and absolutely zero tactile feel. Nevertheless, I decided to test just how badly it breathes in practice, compared to another electronic-focus zoom, the awesomely fast Olympus 35-100mm f2.0. As a practical real-life test, I set up a tripod 12 feet away from a brick wall, with an LED light stand 6 feet away, and racked focus between them. I positioned a vertical black pole on the right side of the frame to make it easy to see how much the frame size changes as the lenses are focused. Surprisingly, I discovered that these two lenses breathe in opposite directions, so I positioned the pole differently to show how its visible width changes as focus is pulled from the brick wall to the LED stand.

Here are the settings I used to test both lenses:

Camera: GH1, Native 24p
Focal length: 35mm
Aperture: f3.5
Shutter speed: 1/60
Frame rate: 24fps
ISO: 100

Panasonic 14-50mm f2.8-3.5

Olympus 35-100mm f2.0

 

[Shooter]

This hasn't really been an issue for me, as I didn't think it was advisable to even attempt to do focus pulls on anything but manual-focus prime lenses.

If the subject or camera moves and you wish to maintain focus on something in the frame...you need to be able to pull focus on whatever lens you are using.

 

[Lpowell]

If the subject or camera moves and you wish to maintain focus on something in the frame...you need to be able to pull focus on whatever lens you are using.

That would be great, but I actually don't trust the focus rings on any of the Panasonic or Olympic zooms to do that for me. The modern zooms are great in their own ways, but they feel nothing like the focus on a solid steel Hexanon prime or one of the first-generation Vivitar Series 1 lenses.

 

[Shooter]

That would be great, but I actually don't trust the focus rings on any of the Panasonic or Olympic zooms to do that for me. The modern zooms are great in their own ways, but they feel nothing like the focus on a solid steel Hexanon prime or one of the first-generation Vivitar Series 1 lenses.

...and thats exactly why you should choose a cine lens to shoot cine work... ideally.

There are a some /a few, stills lenses that are suitable and even the best of them are still a compromise for cine work.

 

[John Brawley]

That would be great, but I actually don't trust the focus rings on any of the Panasonic or Olympic zooms to do that for me. The modern zooms are great in their own ways, but they feel nothing like the focus on a solid steel Hexanon prime or one of the first-generation Vivitar Series 1 lenses.

Well your experience may vary....But i do in-shot focus pulls of the ring on my olympus zooms without a problem. I can't get away with it though on the 14-50.

The whole point of this thread was originally discussing the 12-60 so I think it's kind of pointless to keep talking about the *general* limitation of stills lenses when shooting motion. I should think most are already aware of the shortcomings already...do we need to keep mentioning them ?

Within that framework though, I've been able to get excellent results with the Olympus 4/3 lenses. I haven't had the same luck with the 14-50. That's not just because it's a stills lens...it's just that it's PARTICULARY worse than other stills lenses that I would rate as being adequate.

And banging on about putting cine lenses on this camera defeats the purpose of the small size of the AF100. Just like I hate the way 5D's get pimped up with huge rigs that just make the camera larger and more unwieldily.

I love this camera for the fact that with a 20mm F1.7 or a 50mm Zeiss C/Y or even the 14-35...it's so much smaller than the RED cameras I'm normally using for drama. Putting PL mounted cine lenses is counter-intuitive to the small footprint of the camera. (although I have done it)

I guess if you're trying to get RED-like results then sure, go for cine lenses. But for me, I love this camera for it's small size. But i'm probably not the target buyer of this camera, that actually would use this as a primary camera.

jb

 

[Shooter]

I think it's kind of pointless to keep talking about the *general* limitation of stills lenses when shooting motion. I should think most are already aware of the shortcomings already...do we need to keep mentioning them ?

I dont believe that many that are buying this camera are actually aware of that at all. Plenty of posts about the issues.(including your own about "breathing")

I guess we should just let them find out for themselves .

 

[John Brawley]

I dont believe that many that are buying this camera are actually aware of that at all. Plenty of posts about the issues.(including your own about "breathing")

I guess we should just let them find out for themselves .

I mentioned breathing being worse on one stills lens compared to another stills lens from my own personal experience.

Just simply dismissing all stills lens as not being a sometimes appropriate option isn't really all that helpful either, becausee people are still going to do it and some are clearly better than others. (which was the point I was making).

I'm still surprised by the number of people that want AF and presumably use AF to shoot with. It doesn't really make any sense to me, but then again, I wouldn't presume to tell others how to shoot their pictures. I just know it's not something I would ever want to use.....

jb

 

[Shooter]

You wont hear me dismissing "all stills lenses". I own plenty of them ..hand picked for the task in my own kit.

Like you... there are many more that I wouldnt touch with a barge pole.

One thing we both know...A cine lens does the business because its designed for it. ( As I say..."ideal")